↓ Skip to main content

Inpatient care burden due to cancers in Anhui, China: a cross-sectional household survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Inpatient care burden due to cancers in Anhui, China: a cross-sectional household survey
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2995-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ting Zhao, Jing Cheng, Jing Chai, Rui Feng, Han Liang, Xingrong Shen, Rui Sha, Debin Wang

Abstract

The financial burden of cancers has profound effects and there is a clear need to explore the issue from different perspectives and for different population groups. This study aimed at investigating inpatient cancer care (ICC) burden in Anhui, a typical inland province of China. The study collected data through a household survey conducted during April to November, 2014 using cluster-randomized sampling and a structured questionnaire administered face-to-face by trained interviewers. The survey covered 60,678 urban and rural residents and 318 person-times of ICC during the past year. Age-adjusted annual person-times and days of ICC per thousand population added up to 4.24 and 76.78 respectively and urban residents showed significantly greater admission rates and length of stay than that of rural ones. Total ICC expenditures accounted for 13.30 % of all that of inpatient care for the whole population. Per-case direct and indirect costs of all types of cancers were estimated as 10365.1 and 929.9 RMB. Per-case total cost on ICC at township hospitals was 2142.3 RMB and at province level hospitals, 17133.0 RMB. Significant variations in per-case ICC expenditures also existed between patients with different household income and type of medical insurance systems, but patients suffering from different types of cancers. Out-of-pocket payment due to ICC turned out to be catastrophic for 20.6 % of all cancer patients and 65.2 % for other medical insurance, 45.6 % for enrollees of urban and rural medical insurance, 43.2 % for the 65 to 74 years old. Multi regression revealed statistically significant association between ICC costs and education, reimbursement ratio, household income and level of hospital. Cancers characterize low incidence, moderate service use and high expenses. There exist substantial differences between subgroups and part of these variations cannot be explained by pathological factors. ICC expenses are catastrophic in nature to a large part of patients. There is a clear need for more effectively regulating cancer-related medical practices and service seeking behaviors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,867,895
of 24,051,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,210
of 15,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,303
of 305,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#178
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,051,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,832 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.